Yesterday, the Wonk Room noted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson’s reversal in regards to the aim of the $700 billion Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP). Today, the Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the House Oversight Committee — chaired by Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) — held a hearing to find out whether TARP is being used to prevent home foreclosures, “as Congress intended.”

Kucinich questioned Interim Assistant Secretary for Financial Stability Neel Kashkari — who is charged with administering the $700 billion — as to why the Treasury has not focused more on helping homeowners facing foreclosure. When Kashkari replied that the Treasury Secretary is “passionate” about helping homeowners, Kucinich asked “He is? Where? What country?” Watch it:

Kucinich was absolutely right to be skeptical. As Andrew Jakabovics explained, Paulson “yesterday made it absolutely clear that he had no intention of using the authority granted to him by Congress” to stem foreclosures. “The message was clear to homeowners facing foreclosure and their neighbors watching the value of their homes plummet — drop dead,” wrote Jakabovics.

It’s not as if legitimate plans to help homeowners don’t exist. Today, Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Chairman Sheila Bair released a plan that could “prevent 1.5 million foreclosures in the next year by offering financial incentives to companies that agree to sharply reduce monthly payments on mortgage loans. ”

The estimated cost of this program is $24.4 billion, a drop in the bucket relative to the entire $700 billion program. Treasury and the White House, though, have made it clear that they are not interested.

In testimony before the subcommittee, Center for American Progress Action Fund Senior Fellow Michael Barr explained what Treasury needs to do to aid homeowners:

Under Section 109 of the [Emergency Economic Stabilization Act], the Treasury secretary is authorized to ‘use loan guarantees and credit enhancements to facilitate loan modifications to prevent avoidable foreclosures.’ Under Section 101 of the act, the secretary is authorized to ‘make and fund commitments to purchase’ troubled assets, including home mortgage loans. These authorities can be deployed now to help homeowners and stabilize our markets.

As Jakabovics wrote, “The solution is simple: Focus on the mortgages. Gain access to home mortgages and restructure them. Now.”

Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) today announced his opposition to “any additional relief” for the auto industry, a little more than a month after voting for the troubled $700 billion bailout for the financial industry. In an online chat with the readers of the conservative website RedState, Chambliss was asked where he stands on the auto industry bailout. He responded:

The automobile industry has systemic, deep-rooted problems that money will not solve and I will not support funding any additional relief to the auto industry.

Despite the “systemic, deep-rooted problems” in the financial industry “that money will not solve,” Chambliss voted Yea in both of the Senate votes on October 1st for the $700 billion Wall Street bailout package [Vote #212, Vote #213]. The Treasury has since disbursed hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to investment firms and banks, but “few are rushing to make the loans that companies and consumers need to cushion the economic slump.”

It is true that the auto industry needs to be retooled to be a leader in America’s green recovery. But inaction now could mean irrevocable damage to jobs, businesses, and communities that would make industry reform exponentially more difficult. The implosion of the auto industry would be catastrophic for thousands, if not millions, of American families. As Center for American Progress fellows Bracken Hendricks and Dan Weiss, with Ben Goldstein, explain:

The auto industry is a bedrock of the economy, with “one in 10 American jobs related to auto manufacturing.” Its survival is essential for the future of advanced clean vehicle and energy manufacturing. What’s more, this extra help is imperative to preserve jobs.

The implications of a collapse of General Motors, Ford, or Chrysler are beginning to become apparent. On Thursday, “Standard & Poor’s Ratings Service lowered the credit ratings of two big auto suppliers, and put 13 others on watch for possible reductions, because of their ties to car makers.”

In an October 24 debate with his run-off opponent, Jim Martin (D-GA), Chambliss claimed the hundreds of billions in loans made by Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson “went to free up liquidity so that people in Georgia can once again begin to have the- the freeing up of that credit so that they buy automobiles.”

By the time the “freeing up of that credit” actually takes place, there very well may be many fewer automobiles for Georgians to buy. As economist and blogger Duncan Black commented on news that Congress lacks the votes for action on the auto industry, “It’s pretty interesting that we’re propping up the fake economy and letting the real economy wither.”